TOPIC:

Quite interesting to see Boekhurst and Riggio end up playing Reserves today.

mikeh wrote: Just reflecting on the team further, I wonder if Harding has taken a pragmatic approach to this game given that Swans have already qualified for the finals and that they are now unlikely to nab 2nd spot. Perhaps the loss of Ames and Geappean has convinced him that winning the last two games of the season and therefore securing a home first semi would be more of a priority than going all out to win this game in Bunbury, so maybe he has taken the opportunity to give Riggers and Boekhurst, who have both played in all 17 games this season a bit of a break to freshen them up for a run in to the finals. Both of them looked fatigued at Joondalup last week. So maybe it will be a bit of short term pain this week for long term gain. Just a theory may be wrong.....

The four players, who were dropped from the league team, played in the ressies. Incidentally, we won both colts and ressies today. Clownsend take note: the players were DROPPED because of poor performances last week. Perhaps the CLOWNSEND should laso be DROPPED due to lack of form, lack of credibility and all round poor performances over many years.

Larry Bird wrote: I seem to recall bailing out Swans one of the times they went broke. Money from my own pocket and I know of many other Royals supporters that did the same. Don't see too many supporters from other clubs particularly Swans being supportive of EP's situation. That's the way of the world I guess givers and takers.

LB please explain what position of East Perth Swans should support? What I would suggest you do is that you attend your AGM and demand that the board of East Perth all resign. They have put you in the position your club is - persona non grata. If all the clubs had refused to accept the host club alignment then we would not have the host club alignment. Your club did the deed; not Swans.

Fat Tony wrote: Quite interesting to see Boekhurst and Riggio end up playing Reserves today.

May be Clownsend was at Basso today and we can expect a complete and unreserved apology from the CLOWNSEND in tomorrow's West.

ArkRoyal wrote: Larry: EP certainly did give the impression that money was the reason for signing on to the 'alignment'; for example, the 'alignment' means that you do not have to pay for coaches.

Just one point we do pay for Dawson who was appointed before the alignment announcement, the ancillary league coaches apart from Pickeering are another issue.

Grump wrote:

ArkRoyal wrote: Larry: EP certainly did give the impression that money was the reason for signing on to the 'alignment'; for example, the 'alignment' means that you do not have to pay for coaches.

Just one point we do pay for Dawson who was appointed before the alignment announcement, the ancillary league coaches apart from Pickeering are another issue.

Grump were you at Basso today, and if so what did you think of the games.

With respect to your point it is unquestionably a huge advantage your club has over the G7 clubs in terms of support staff and software.

swan42: very well put indeed about needing a change of board at EP
Grump: point taken -- thanks

swan42 wrote:

Larry Bird wrote: I seem to recall bailing out Swans one of the times they went broke. Money from my own pocket and I know of many other Royals supporters that did the same. Don't see too many supporters from other clubs particularly Swans being supportive of EP's situation. That's the way of the world I guess givers and takers.

LB please explain what position of East Perth Swans should support? What I would suggest you do is that you attend your AGM and demand that the board of East Perth all resign. They have put you in the position your club is - persona non grata. If all the clubs had refused to accept the host club alignment then we would not have the host club alignment. Your club did the deed; not Swans.

The g7 were united they allowed the alignment.They could have been united and not let it in.They could have been united and allowed stand alone teams from the eagles&dockers.G7 have more power then east perth or peel.who did the deed.it wasn't east perth we only have one vote.g7 have seven votes.I knew my time in the bank would come in handy.

I will repeat again no alternate is available. I'm not sure how many nominations other clubs get for board roles. I will repeat again there is no alternative ticket to vote for. You can't vote for someone that doesn't exist, this is the WAFL not the AFL. I would vote for them but it's not an option. Can I just ask the G7 presidents to negotiate with some proper diligence in future.

chaddy22 wrote:

swan42 wrote:

Larry Bird wrote: I seem to recall bailing out Swans one of the times they went broke. Money from my own pocket and I know of many other Royals supporters that did the same. Don't see too many supporters from other clubs particularly Swans being supportive of EP's situation. That's the way of the world I guess givers and takers.

LB please explain what position of East Perth Swans should support? What I would suggest you do is that you attend your AGM and demand that the board of East Perth all resign. They have put you in the position your club is - persona non grata. If all the clubs had refused to accept the host club alignment then we would not have the host club alignment. Your club did the deed; not Swans.

The g7 were united they allowed the alignment.They could have been united and not let it in.They could have been united and allowed stand alone teams from the eagles&dockers.G7 have more power then east perth or peel.who did the deed.it wasn't east perth we only have one vote.g7 have seven votes.I knew my time in the bank would come in handy.

Chaddy22 there was no possibility of the WAFL clubs voting in favour of the WA domiciled AFL teams having their own reserves' teams in the WAFL. What the WA domiciled AFL teams did was to get into bed with two WAFL clubs. If all WAFL clubs had opposed a host club alignment we would still have the same system where the AFL aligned players were distributed throughout the 9 WAFL clubs.

Once there were two WAFL clubs, yours and Peel, the remaining seven WAFL clubs attempted to try to get the best out of what was presented to them as fait accompli. No amount of posturing will change the fact that it was a fait accompli because if the G7 clubs were able to veto the host club alignment it would have been vetoed.

Now we have one of the host clubs considered more of a joke than they previous were and when you have 16 Freo players in your team you can hardly claim that the team is your team anymore.

With respect to your team chaddy22 the host club alignment has isolated your club, alienated a considerable number of your members and supporters. One can only wonder what your club's supporters thought who were at Hands Oval yesterday and witnessed an Eagles' mascot on the ground.